Devil's Advocate - Why WOULD you restore the Scarlet Course?

[Tom_Doak]

Before I go on my next trip, I thought I would throw out this position for all you restoration gurus to argue about.  With apologies to Tom MacWood and Lou Duran:  Why WOULD you "restore" the Scarlet Course at OSU?

MacKenzie made one trip to Columbus in 1929 or 1930 to lay out the course.  In 1930-33, when business was dead, he wrote letters begging them to get the course started, to no avail.  When MacKenzie died, his estate settled with the University for some additional payment in return for a full set of green plans ... there is some question whether many of these are in Mackenzie's hand or were drawn by someone else.  

In the end, the Scarlet course was finally built in 1935-36, so Dr. MacKenzie never saw any of it.  True, you could say the same thing about Royal Melbourne, but in that case you'd be restoring the physical work of Alex Russell and Mick Morcom.  In Columbus you'd be restoring the work of an OSU alum named McCoy, who worked for a golf course contractor, who got the job of building MacKenzie's plans after the university passed on Perry Maxwell (and a young Robert Trent Jones).  McCoy's only experience building a MacKenzie course was at St. Charles in Manitoba, which I don't think MacKenzie ever visited during construction, either.

The truth of the matter is that there is nothing of MacKenzie's in the ground at OSU to preserve.  Everything there today is the interpretation of Mr. McCoy, just as much as everything which is changed will be the interpretation of Mr. Nicklaus and associates.  Presumably, the university has decided it would prefer the latter.

PS  Mr. Soileau and anyone else at Nicklaus Design are welcome to comment on their interpretation of the word "restoration" in this case.

[TEPaul]

"In 1930-33, when business was dead, he wrote letters begging them to get the course started, to no avail.  When MacKenzie died, his estate settled with the University for some additional payment in return for a full set of green plans ..."

TomD:

Maybe this is what the university should be interested in both researching and putting on the ground now! To whatever extent possible perhaps they should just try to determine if those are MacKenzie's plans or green plans and just do them on the ground as best they can with the Nicklaus Co now. Why not, what've they got to lose? Would they be tearing something up at this point that's better than those plans seem to be? Who even cares if those plans really weren't from Mackenzie's hand? They'll still have to ask and answer the question if those plans built now on that course will make a better golf course than what's there now. At least, I thought that's what good architects are supposed to determine and then do!

[A_Clay_Man]

If you had plans all drawn-up, and the course was constructed after you demise, do you think it could be restored, or should be modernized, 70 years later?

talk about DA!

[rgkeller]

"Why WOULD you "restore" the Scarlet Course at OSU?"

To ensure that the Scarlet Course remained the REAL McCOY

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

Tom, Your point is valid if the only reason to restore was because of the reputation of an architect. I will quality by saying I have only played the Scarlet course one time and that was 17 years ago. I found the course to be a wonderful test of golf and a golf experience that touched the heart and soul of  buckeyes everywhere. I pay proper respect to Yale and Stanford, but I thought Ohio State was what I would want a college golf complex to be. The discussion should be one of restoration versus renovation and the balance that should take place here. How to maintain the heart and soul of what is good both in the golf and the golf experience while modernizing and improving distances, drainage, irragation, practice, tree removal etc. I will take this a step to the personal. The LSU facility is beyond description in facilities such as practice, film rooms etc. The course is ok and that is not a slap at Jim Lipe for he had a bad piece of land to work on and a real estate concept to work with. All in all we scored average on the test when it comes to what a golf complex can do for a university in the area of the golf team, student usage, fundraising for the University, reflection of the land and character of the people state in this case and over all golf experience. Ohio State has an important decision to make for this course is more than just a golf course to the Buckeyes and the people of Ohio.

[Ken Fry]

Whether the folks involved wish to call this a "restoration" or a "redesign," there is no way they could produce MacKenzie's work even with detailed plans.

Like most college golf courses, length has become the major issue.  Anything under 7000 yards is deemed "not worthy" to host NCAA tournaments or too short to handle the "modern college player."  Will MacKenzie's plans call for a 7500 yard golf course?  When Nicklaus Design is done with the course, it may be better to look upon this work as a "modernization" than a "restoration."

Am I way off base with this?

[TEPaul]

"To ensure that the Scarlet Course remained the REAL McCOY"

rg:

That's a good one! But look, OSU and the Nicklaus Co. should try to restore the course to those old MacKenzie plans anyway---all they really need to do is completely stretch them. It doesn't really matter if whatever they do is a rennovation, remodel, improvement or a whole new redesign---the only thing that's important is no matter what it is they should definitely call it a MacKenzie restoration anyway. Who cares if it may never have been built the way he wanted it?

I mean, afterall we've been through on here in minute detail pretty much everything in architecture there is to discuss already, so we do need something like this to create 20 page posts into 2010 about what OSU really is---Nicklaus, some DA, or some form of a Mc or a Mac---and whether or not it can or should technically be called a restoration or something else! Then Pat can come on here and debate with everyone the definition of "a" in "a restoration"!

But I can see it now. Jack's going to go in there and claim that due to technology everybody in the world hits it farther now than he ever could and the course will need to be stretched to 7700+ yards.

Do you think these young bucks at OSU now and in the future care what's done to the course is called? Or who it looks and smells like--eg Mackenzie or someone else? All they want is a bunch of 200+ yard par 3s, 499 yard par 4s and 615 yard par 5s so they can smash it around and call it challenging!

[TEPaul]

"Will MacKenzie's plans call for a 7500 yard golf course?  When Nicklaus Design is done with the course, it may be better to look upon this work as a "modernization" than a "restoration.""

KFry:

Not at all--this can be a MacKenzie restoration! Jack's a smart guy and this stuff is not rocket science. All Jack needs to do is take those MacKenzie plans and do them exactly as they are only make everything about them 25% bigger. That way Jack will do an exact MacKenzie restoration that looks like MacKenzie only it will about 8125 yards long. Jack will be a hero as they'll even be some built in "elasticity" that may not be needed for at least two or three years!

[Jeff_Mingay]

I imagine OSU would like to host an NCAA men's tournament in the future. And, considering there is no longer effective equipment regulation in golf, it probably makes sense to renovate the Scarlet course accordingly.

That said, the ideal result would probably be a "new" Scarlet course that's challenging enough for America's best collegiate players [of the future], and that also exhibits a classic, historical aesthetic that reflects Mackenzie's original scheme and unique style. That, I guess you would call, a "sensitive restoration" of the Scarlet.

All things considered, too, it makes sense that Nicklaus was awarded the job. Greatest golfer of all-time + accomplished course architect + OSU alum + Columbus native... man, if I was invited to interview for the job, knowing that Jack was also asked, I would have done the same as Doak. "Thanks, but no thanks."

I'm anxious to see the results...  

[Ken Fry]

TEPaul,

When the Trent Jones Trail opened in Alabama, much of the hype revolved around many of the courses capable of being stretched to 7800 yards long.  Isn't it interesting (and sad) that today those distances don't seem so far fetched.

Ken

[RJ_Daley]

Mea culpa...

I was under the misinformed notion that the routing and generalities of the design such as bunker placement and style were MacKenzie's, and the green design and contouring was Maxwell's.  

The truth of the matter is that there is nothing of MacKenzie's in the ground at OSU to preserve.  Everything there today is the interpretation of Mr. McCoy, just as much as everything which is changed will be the interpretation of Mr. Nicklaus and associates.  Presumably, the university has decided it would prefer the latter.

rgkeller: the real McCoy, I second TEPaul, that is a good one!

The only question I now have is:  Was McCoy one of the greatest unhearlded golf course designers ever?  Should his work be preserved or restored?

[Tommy_Naccarato]

"From the beginning it was Lynn St.John's dream to build a premier golf complex for the Ohio State University. When other institutions were contemplating 9 and 18-hole courses, St.John boldly proposed thirty-six holes and 36 holes designed by the world's greatest golf architect. From that highpoint in October of 1929 when Alister MacKenzie was chosen, the Golf Course project suffered one major setback after another - the Great Depression, the untimely death of Dr.MacKenzie, the death of Wendell Miller and the unfortunate alienation of Perry Maxwell. But through it all there was a constant, St.John's unfailing desire to see that the university build a 'MacKenzie' course. After every crisis, it would have been easy to go another direction or to cancel the project all together, but he persisted and the result was as close to a MacKenzie creation as was possible under the circumstances. Not only should St.John be given credit for his dogged persistence, but also he should be given credit for what he didn't do. He could have easily hired Donald Ross or Trent Jones, and had he Ohio State may have a more polished product today, but St.John was convinced of MacKenzie genius and history agrees. Cypress Point, Augusta National, Royal Melbourne and Crystal Downs are considered among the world's greatest courses. No other architect, living or dead, can match his impressive list of accomplishments. St.John was confident that MacKenzie would provide Ohio State with a similar world class design and after his death he showed great foresight in insisting that his plan be followed. The greatness of the present course is its framework, a sensational routing utilizing the natural features of the site and a set of intriguing greens. In some respects McClure and McCoy involvement may have been a blessing, these two relatively anonymous men were wise to realize their limitations and showed great restraint. And thankfully over the years very little in the way of tampering has taken place. Ohio State has a great opportunity, an opportunity to complete a masterpiece that because of several unfortunate twists of fate has never been fully realized. The frame is there, all that is needed is an artist to complete the painting by introducing MacKenzie's brilliant bunkering and strategic genius. And there has never been a better time to find qualified practitioner, but those making the decision must have the wisdom and vision of St.John, and only settle for the very best in the world. The Ohio State golf course has been in a deep freeze awaiting breakthrough, waiting for someone to complete what the good Doctor's started. And when that work is finally carried out, St.John and Ohio State will finally have their 'MacKenzie' course.--from My Home Course by Tom MacWood

I think this about says it all perfectly with the exception that Jim Lipe, Tom Solieu and Co would be better served by having Tom MacWood, a OSU Alumni, to be used as a historical consultant for this project. Frankly, nobody probably knows the course better then Tom, and he has the facts and information to prove it.

You guys can get ahold of him at: tmacwood@columbus.rr.com I highly suggest that you do it.

[TEPaul]

"The only question I now have is:  Was McCoy one of the greatest unhearlded golf course designers ever?  Should his work be preserved or restored?"

RJ:

This is an excellent question---so I should say good show on you! Whether or not McCoy should go into the "Unhearlded Architect Hall of Fame" and in what ranking position deserves it's own 20 page thread, in my opinion! If he does, though, I can almost guarantee you he wouldn't be that close to Bethpage Black's Burbeck! Burbeck probably deserves to remain on top of the heap for all time in the "unheralded architect" category! I mean can you imagine the wonderful things that man did for a number of years, from coming up with the idea of mimicing PVGC on LI, to routing, designing and completing the construction of that great course and getting no recognition at all for it while his long-suffering wife stood by and watched this man go through all that pain, not to mention what his impressionable little son must have thought?!

And all the while that despicable sot Tillinghast was stealing his thunder and trying to figure out at almost the same time how to sell his architectural principles out to the highest bidder and set about destroying those magnificent "duffer zone" bunkers of the wonderful old courses all over America as rapidly as possible!?

[TEPaul]

TommyN:

Where you been Pal? Good post there. OSU Scarlett seems to have nothing to lose by putting the Nicklaus Co in touch with Tom MacWood's research on that course to allow them to analyze it!

[McCloskey]

TEP and others
It seems to me that a huge assumption is being made here.   That assumption being that if Nicklaus were to just get the original McKenzie plans and build them with some stretch to meet today's modern equipment, then the course would be a great success.   Well, we don't know that do we?   We do know that the Scarlet is a fine golf course, and per TD, we know that McKenzie had very little to do with the final product that we now call McKenzie's Scarlet course.   So what would this board say if Nicklaus followed McKenzie's plans exactly, with only some added length, and the course turned out to be inferior to the present course.   What if Jack forced himself to NOT make changes, etc., that he, as an accomplished designer, thought should be made but differed from McKenzie's ideas.   Would Jack not be accused of ruining a great McKenzie course?  I think he would.    Then if he were to implement his own ideas, no matter how superior they might have been compared to McKenzie's ideas, he would be accused of not restoring but redesigning a McKenzie course.
Therefore, I am in agreement with TD.   IF they only have green plans possilby from McKenzie, then that is the only area where I think Nicklaus should try to stay with the same "style", and as close as possible.   Also the routing should not be changed if it were found to be McKenzie's routing.   Other than what they can actually attribute to McKenzie, I say Nicklaus and his team should give it their best design effort and let an improved Scarlet course result.
Once again, however, it seems Nicklaus is in a no win position with many on this board, either way it goes.

[TEPaul]

"TEP and others
It seems to me that a huge assumption is being made here."

McCloskey:

Good post there. Sure, huge assumptions are being made here! That's the way it generally is on Golfclubatlas.com!  

[McCloskey]

TEPaul
I think I am beginning to see the light!

[A_Clay_Man]

Once again, however, it seems Nicklaus is in a no win position with many on this board, either way it goes.

That's not just Jack, it's everyone and everything nowadays.


Did you miss what TN posted about the course? And the man who held the project together, and what motivated him?

Lumping many, into a Jack bash, is not very productive or answers the questions from many of us.

They don't have to hire Tom MacWood, just read his piece, and, Be that artist..

[Tommy_Naccarato]

No Adam,
They need to hire Tom MacWood and let him do further research on the course to make sure it comes out exaclty as it is stated.

[Mike Hendren]

[iNot only should St.John be given credit for his dogged persistence, but also he should be given credit for what he didn't do. He could have easily hired Donald Ross or Trent Jones, and had he Ohio State may have a more polished product today, but St.John was convinced of MacKenzie genius and history agrees. [/i]

Well thank goodness the powers-that-be at OSU did not resort to hiring a bozo like Donald Ross!  What a travesty that would have been.

BTW, is there a punch-bowl green at OSU?  If so, I strongly suggest they re-name the hole "Woody Hayes."

Mike

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

Mike it is close to football season isn't it. John